Europe vs Switzerland. The struggle over the H2020 program

It happened again: after the Israeli
case, Horizon
2020 is anew in the middle of a political clash. This time the situation is
even worse than the Israel one, both because it is within the European
geographical region and because Switzerland had been a key player in the
previous Seventh Framework Program. Roughly, the question is: is it fair
towards EU citizens that European institutions that are based on the “free
movement of persons and ideas” gives their moneys to a Country that refuted
this ideal? On the Swiss side, traditionally the referendums are strong and
powerful tools to bind political decisions to citizens' will. For that reason,
the February 9th Referendum is a non-returning point. On the
European Union side, otherwise, it is a matter of giving money (a lot of money)
to a country that is refuting the freedom of movements of its citizens. This is
a clear case of diplomatic fight, an intricate but meaningful example of how
science and diplomacy are strictly linked.

From EU-Swiss agreements to the
Switzerland performance in 7FP

As been part of the EFTA, the free trade area of the European continent (an
organization backed by the US to support European integration), during
the 90s Switzerland had signed ten bilateral agreements with the
European Union. Two agreements deal respectively with the free movement of
citizens and the access
of the Swiss research institutions to European grants. On these
bases, Switzerland entered enthusiastically the Seventh Framework Program, with
great performances (see figures above, in the infographics). A negotiations
session for the participation of Switzerland in the Horizon 2020 and Erasmus+
programs had been scheduled for mid-February, but then, after the Referendum, almost
frozen.

Out of doubt, and despite political
considerations, Switzerland is part of the European scientific community. As
shown by the infographics, many scientific researchers working in Switzerland
are not Swiss nationals: for this reason they couldn't vote for the Referendum
about migration policy in the Confederation. Briefly, the Referendum, called
“Popular initiative against Mass Immigration” was backed by the Swiss People's
Party, and gained success particularly in the Ticino canton. The Referendum has
passed with 50.3% of positive votes, underlining strong differences between the
Cantons and, mainly, between the ruling class – which endorsed a rejection of
the Referendum – and the majority of the Swiss population. The referendum
imposed quota on immigration into the Confederation borders, with no
distinction for what purpose the migration is aimed, such as work, study,
research or humanitarian. No one can say what will be the real effects
of this decision, as Swiss economy and culture are strongly linked with the
rest of Europe. Great concerns are based on a clause of the referendum stating that “international treaties
opposite to this article cannot be signed... International treaties that
contradict Article 121a should be renegotiated and adjusted within three years
after the adoption of this article”.

Due to these two clauses, Swiss
authorities couldn't widen the free circulation agreement to the newly entered
Member State of the European Union, Croatia. This had been taken by the EU
institutions as the first
practical results of the validity of the referendum. The EU has immediately frozen all
the negotiations with the Swiss Confederation, including those relating to
H2020 and Erasmus+. Anyway, insiders
said that “the EU
legislative machine and deal-making with Switzerland will continue on the
institutional framework as normal until the Swiss government puts forward its
anti-EU migrant bill”. And they were right.

What will happen

On February 25th, the
Swiss State Secretariat for Education Research and Innovation announced that an
agreement had been concluded with the EU. The result is that the Confederation
will be considered as a third country in applying for Horizon 2020 calls. This means that “researchers in
Switzerland may continue to take part in partnership projects [but they are] no
longer able to take part in individual projects due to its third country
status”. Meanwhile, a group of European scientists promoted a petition to stop this political
clash (and the results of the referendum).